CompFox Logo
AboutWorkflowFeaturesPricingCase LawInsights

Updated Daily

Case Law Database

Access over workers' compensation decisions, including En Banc, Significant Panel Decisions, and writ-denied cases.

Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Fouchecourt v. Metropolitan Opera Ass'n

Jean-Paul Fouehécourt, an opera singer, sustained injuries after falling from a stage platform during a performance at the Metropolitan Opera House. He filed a diversity action against the Metropolitan Opera Association, Inc. ('the Met') and Franco Zeffirelli, seeking damages for his injuries. The Met moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing that Fouehécourt was covered by the New York State Workers’ Compensation Law, which provides an exclusive remedy and bars such actions. The court agreed, finding that Fouehécourt, as a performing artist, fell under the statutory definition of an 'employee' for workers' compensation purposes, despite his contract stating he was an 'outside contractor.' Consequently, the court granted the Met's motion, dismissing the complaint with prejudice.

Workers' CompensationExclusive RemedyIndependent ContractorPerforming ArtsOpera SingerNegligenceDismissalStatutory InterpretationLegislative HistoryNew York Law
References
7
Case No. 2020 NY Slip Op 00076 [179 AD3d 436]
Regular Panel Decision
Jan 07, 2020

White v. Metropolitan Opera Assn., Inc.

The Supreme Court granted plaintiff Wendy White's motion to dismiss the defendant Metropolitan Opera Association, Inc.'s second affirmative defense and for partial summary judgment on liability. The motion court determined that White is specifically excluded as an "employee" of the defendant for purposes of the Workers' Compensation Law. It further ruled that the special employee doctrine could not be applied to classify her as an employee under the Workers' Compensation Law. On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed this order. This decision reiterates the strict interpretation of "employee" status within the context of workers' compensation statutes.

Workers' Compensation LawEmployee StatusSpecial Employee DoctrineSummary JudgmentAffirmative DefenseAppellate ReviewStatutory InterpretationEmployer LiabilityPlaintiff MotionDefendant Exclusion
References
2
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Singer v. Bell

Plaintiffs Steven and Dulce Singer, New York residents, sued multiple New Jersey residents, including Sheldon Liebowitz and his law firm, Liebowitz, Liebowitz & Clark, Esqs. The action stemmed from a New Jersey matrimonial litigation where Steven Singer failed to pay child support to his ex-wife, Emily Singer Bell. An arrest warrant was issued for Singer for $48,031 in arrearages. Plaintiffs alleged that other defendants lured Steven Singer to New Jersey, where he was arrested and detained, violating his constitutional rights (Fourth, Fifth, Fourteenth Amendments) and civil rights (42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1985). The specific defendants (Liebowitz and his firm) moved to dismiss the action against them, arguing lack of personal jurisdiction in New York as they do no business there and did not participate in the alleged luring scheme. Plaintiffs claimed jurisdiction under New York Civ.Prac.Law § 302(a)(2) or (3), asserting the defendants conspired with others who committed acts in New York. The court found that plaintiffs failed to make a prima facie showing of conspiracy and presented only speculation and conjecture without evidentiary facts. Therefore, the court granted the motion to dismiss the action against Liebowitz and his firm for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Personal JurisdictionMotion to DismissConspiracyCivil RightsFourth AmendmentFifth AmendmentFourteenth Amendment42 U.S.C. § 198542 U.S.C. § 1983New York Civil Practice Law § 302(a)
References
22
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Singer v. Salomon Bros.

James A. Singer, a former managing director at Salomon Brothers, Inc., alleged discriminatory dismissal based on his disability, breach of contract, and quantum meruit after his employment was terminated following a cancer diagnosis. Salomon Brothers moved to stay Singer's action and compel arbitration, citing an arbitration clause in Singer's U-4 form. Singer contended that his state discrimination claims were not arbitrable and that the U-4 form constituted an employment contract, thus falling under the Federal Arbitration Act's (FAA) employment contract exemption. The court, however, following US Supreme Court precedent, ruled that the U-4 form was a contract with the securities exchanges, not the employer, and therefore not exempt from the FAA. Concluding that arbitration is a favored means of dispute resolution, even for discrimination claims, and that Singer failed to demonstrate that arbitration would be an inadequate forum, the court granted Salomon Brothers' motion to stay the action and compel arbitration.

Arbitration AgreementEmployment DiscriminationDisability DiscriminationFederal Arbitration ActU-4 FormSecurities IndustryNew York Human Rights LawMotion to Compel ArbitrationInterstate CommerceWrongful Termination
References
9
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision

Coffey v. Singer Asset Finance Co., LLC

Appellants Rebecca Coffey, Angela Douglas, Donna Kisor, and Elizabeth Wallace appealed summary judgments dismissing their claims against Singer Asset Finance Company, Settlement Capital Corporation, and Merrick Bank Corporation. Appellants had previously settled personal injury lawsuits, receiving structured payments, and later took loans from appellees, using their future settlement payments as collateral. They sought to void these security interests, arguing they were prohibited by the insurance code, structured settlement documents, and public policy, contending the pledges constituted unlawful assignments or commutations. The court affirmed the trial court's judgment, concluding that the loan transactions created security interests, not assignments or commutations, and were thus permitted under the insurance code. Furthermore, the court found that the appellants had either waived or were estopped from asserting anti-assignment provisions in their original settlement agreements, and that these transactions did not violate public policy.

Structured SettlementsSecurity InterestsAnti-Assignment ClausesWaiverEstoppelPublic PolicyAnnuity ContractsInsurance CodeTexas LawLoan Agreements
References
15
Case No. ADJ1805486
Regular
Jul 01, 2010

SUZANNE SINGER vs. DISNEYLAND, DISNEY WORLD WIDE SERVICES

The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board dismissed applicant Suzanne Singer's petition for reconsideration because it was a successive petition. Singer sought reconsideration of a prior decision that affirmed the denial of her industrial injury claim from October 7, 2004. The Board found that Singer was not newly aggrieved by the prior decision and her only recourse was a writ of review, not another petition for reconsideration. Therefore, the Board dismissed her petition.

successive petitionpetition for reconsiderationindustrial injuryspecial missionwrit of reviewAppeals BoardWCJdeviationresume missionintoxicated
References
5
Case No. 2024 NY Slip Op 04519
Regular Panel Decision
Sep 24, 2024

Hernandez v. Opera Owners, Inc.

The Appellate Division, First Department, reversed a Supreme Court order denying third-party defendant Poltech Inc.'s motion to dismiss or stay a third-party action. The court found that common-law claims against Poltech Inc. should be dismissed because the complaint did not allege a 'grave injury' as required by Workers' Compensation Law § 11 (1). Additionally, the remainder of the third-party action against Poltech Inc. was stayed because the contractual claims, asserted by third-party plaintiffs as third-party beneficiaries of a contract involving Poltech, were subject to the contract's Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) clause.

Workers' Compensation LawGrave InjuryThird-Party ActionContractual DisputeADR ClauseAppellate ReviewMotion to DismissStay of ProceedingsThird-Party Beneficiary
References
8
Case No. MISSING
Regular Panel Decision
Nov 04, 2011

Mayo v. Metropolitan Opera Ass'n, Inc.

This case concerns an appeal from an order and judgment regarding a worker's fall from a ladder at the Metropolitan Opera House. Plaintiff Manuel Mayo sustained injuries while trying to close a hatch door on the roof, leading to claims under Labor Law §§ 240(1) and 200 and common-law negligence against Lincoln Center and Metropolitan Opera Association (the Met). The court found Met and Lincoln Center liable under Labor Law § 240(1) for failing to provide adequate safety devices. Additionally, the Met pursued claims against third-party defendants Strauss Painting and Creative Finishes for breach of an agreement to procure insurance. The decision largely affirmed the lower court's rulings but modified the Met's motion for summary judgment against Creative Finishes due to unresolved factual issues regarding contractual obligations. Nova Casualty Company was granted summary judgment, declaring no obligation to indemnify the Met or Creative due to untimely notice of claim and other policy conditions.

Labor Law § 240(1) LiabilityLabor Law § 200Common-Law NegligenceSummary Judgment MotionBreach of ContractInsurance Procurement AgreementIndemnification ClaimsThird-Party LitigationUntimely Notice of ClaimAdditional Insured Status
References
4
Case No. ADJ6540051, ADJ6540050
Regular
Jun 16, 2010

CHARLOTTE SINGER vs. COUNTY OF FRESNO

This case involves a Petition for Removal filed by applicant Craig Singer (deceased) against the County of Fresno. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) denied the petition, adopting the reasoning of the workers' compensation administrative law judge's report. Therefore, the appeal challenging the findings of fact and order denying the petition for removal was unsuccessful.

Petition for RemovalWorkers' Compensation Appeals BoardFindings of FactOrder Denying PetitionCounty of FresnoPermissibly Self-InsuredClaims Management Inc.ADJ6540051Deceased ApplicantAdministrative Law Judge Report
References
0
Case No. ADJ8740864, ADJ8764475, ADJ8960944
Regular
Oct 16, 2025

KATHY BRANDOW vs. LAW OFFICES OF WAYNE SINGER, THE HARTFORD

Applicant Kathy Brandow sought to disqualify a workers' compensation administrative law judge (WCJ), alleging bias and conflict of interest. The defendants, Law Offices of Wayne Singer and The Hartford, responded, and the WCJ filed a report recommending denial of the petition. After reviewing all submissions, the Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied the petition for disqualification, finding no grounds for bias or prejudice. The Board further cautioned the applicant against repeatedly filing unmeritorious motions, warning that such conduct could lead to vexatious litigant proceedings.

WCABPetition for DisqualificationWCJ biasconflict of interestLabor Code 5311Code of Civil Procedure 641unqualified opinionenmitybiasWCAB Rule 10960
References
7
Showing 1-10 of 24 results

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.

CompFox Logo

The AI standard for workers' compensation professionals. Faster research, deeper analysis, better outcomes.

Product

  • Platform
  • Workflow
  • Features
  • Pricing

Solutions

  • Defense Firms
  • Applicants' Attorneys
  • Insurance carriers
  • Medical Providers

Company

  • About
  • Insights
  • Case Law

Legal

  • Privacy
  • Terms
  • Trust
  • Cookies
  • Subscription

© 2026 CompFox Inc. All rights reserved.

Systems Operational